Skypath is a disaster not only for the residents of Northcote Point but for all Auckland ratepayers who will end up picking up the tab when this white elephant fails to meet its projected patronage numbers. Just as the cost of Len Brown’s vanity project the CRL has already doubled to $5 billion and, I predict, will double again before the next mayoralty term is out, so has the cost of Skypath gone from $30 million to double that amount while the project is still in the planning stage.

Both these politically driven projects fail to meet any cost/benefit analysis or business case. Yet they are being foisted on hapless residents and ratepayers to meet the needs of the few ‘special needs’ people of Generation Zero, Cycle Action and their activist Auckland Council activist bureaucrats.

These two vanity projects alone will bankrupt the city because the government has yet to commit to the CRL. NZTA has yet to commit to Skypath, and Council has already reached its debt limit. Without taxpayer money neither project is viable. Despite this, Auckland Council is foolishly pushing ahead with both projects leaving Auckland ratepayers alone to pick up the tab.

​The people of Northcote Point are fighting a rearguard action to keep their unique heritage area of Auckland safe from an invasion of mamil cyclists who want to destroy their heritage suburb forever. They need money to fight for their area in the coming Environment Court action that seeks to stop the Skypath madness in its tracks. To this end they have set up a ‘Give a little’ page asking for donations to help fund legal costs for their fight in the Environment Court.

No pedestrians will use Skypath, touted as being a shared path. To do so they would be taking their lives in their hands. It is only lycra-clad mamils that will make the long journey across the bridge into the city and they will attack the steep downhill stretch of the harbour bridge at speeds in excess of 70kph in an enclosed cage. Safety experts warn of the consequences.

As Skypath opponents point out “SkyPath is effectively a short-term, politically driven extravagance that simply cannot accommodate the huge crowds needed for its financial viability, either on the pathway itself, or at the end of the cul-de-sac suburbs (Northcote Point and Westhaven), where its entries are located."

This madness will continue until Auckland votes to rid its Council of spendthrift elected members like the Terrible Ten and replaces them with people of common sense and financial prudence.

Thank Goodness some people like Jo Holmes can see what an obvious folly and public-money rort SkyPath is. And incidentally, SkyPath's cost hasn't just doubled from its published $33M cost. Its cost is closer to ten times the cost its purportedly private (but fully publicly funded) developer claims.

The Council-funded and related SeaPath project - necessary for Skypath's operational viability - comes at a cost of $87M for one of its published versions - the only workable version.

The AT-funded and also-necessary "Safe Cycleway" has doubled in cost from $4M to $8M. All the cost increases appear to relate to the Northcote Point section of that proposal, which exists solely to service SkyPath.

The Bridge strengthening costs made necessary by SkyPath have also been hidden to date. Although nobody had admitted so as yet, those costs reportedly amount to hundreds of millions of dollars.

The reported costs for Skypath itself, have not been increased since its construction changed from aluminium to exotic fibre. Everyone knows that exotic fibre construction is more than double the cost of aluminium. That's why exotic fibre is used on Americas cup yachts and generally not others. The reported $30M cost of the previous aluminium structure could now be expected to be $60M or more.

All those costs arise solely for the benefit of SkyPath's purportedly private developer, whose costs to date, have all been either met or underwritten by Council, while some councillors repeatedly claim otherwise.

Those costs should all be accounted for accordingly, as SkyPath costs to Council's account. In fact, having been in the public arena for 3 1/2 years, it's about time Council admitted to SkyPath's real costs, and made them available for scrutiny, as it was asked to do three years ago. It's our ratepayer money they're spending, after all.

Reply

Anon-o-mouse

3/7/2016 04:52:30 pm

Auckland Council delivering a major infrastructure project with a charitable trust has been done before .
And the charity who delivered that multimillion dollar project has unaudited, unsigned, accounts - have no asset list, lacks detail and clarity between what was delivered by council and what is owned by the trust. And incurs a massive ongoing running cost. How are skypaths trustees chosen? Will council get to have representatives. Will there be diverse public representation on the board of trustees for skypath. What is the relationship specifically with council - is it a partnership? Will their be published public minutes, and agendas from Skypath. Will there be open meetings. Can citizens ask for Official information from Skypath if public money goes in. Hopefully they demand better accounting and transparency on the accounts that the last political project.

Reply

RockyJ

3/7/2016 05:44:09 pm

Totally agree, Jo. In regard to urban transport there has been no debate around alternatives to the rail loop, like more creative use of buses. The bus lane over the bridge is a great example of how bus only roads can be successful and this model could easily and cheaply be expanded to the rest of Auckland

Reply

Matthew Browne

3/7/2016 07:13:10 pm

The bridge badly needs some kind of crossing available, other than by motor vehicle. I can't, for the life of me, understand why anyone would object. It seems unbelievably selfish of residents, on either side, to oppose this. I'm strongly in favour. Get a grip....using your video as an example is grossly out of line with reality. Comparing a 'one off' novelty event and the mass organization required to safely negotiate vast numbers of people crossing, doesn't compare to a 24hr/7days a week operation, where numbers won't be nearly as compressed.